It took me a long time to find the text of the Open letter written by 23 professors of computer science about the NHS plans in April 2006 (now included below in one of the Computer Weekly extracts). Most of the links below came up while I was searching for it. I may go on adding other links as I stumble across them. The critical tone of the reports in various news publications seems to be escalating, raising all sorts of questions about various combinations of incompetence and possibly something worse, among people involved.I may prettify this file later.
It contain's Sean Brennan's interesting December 2005 presentation (alas only available in powerpoint, not pdf) at Bristol and Leicester BCS Meetings.
The problems that the NHS IT project are intended to address are clearly and convincingly presented. My arguments are only about whether the proposed methods have any chance of success.
It provides some useful pointers, including links to the Integrated Care Record Service (ICRS) Specification July 03, which appears to have been the basis of invitations to tender for the contract. The detailed documents are
======================================================================= THE NHS VIEW http://www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk/delivery/ewa/news/news_novell CONNECTINGFORHEALTH WEB SITE "This deal with Novell also reduces the barriers for the NHS in using Open Source, as it secures access to an enterprise class Open Source platform along with, more importantly, affordable support, maintenance and training to help our NHS staff make the transition http://www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk/ CONNECTINGFORHEALTH WEB SITE NHS Connecting for Health is delivering the National Programme for IT to bring modern computer systems into the NHS which will improve patient care and services. Over the next ten years, the National Programme for IT will connect over 30,000 GPs in England to almost 300 hospitals and give patients access to their personal health and care information, transforming the way the NHS works. =======================================================================
======================================================================= COMMENTS IN THE COMPUTER/IT/GENERAL NEWS PRESS This is not a comprehensive collection. (In reverse chronological order) ======================================================================= http://technology.guardian.co.uk/weekly/story/0,,2033496,00.html GUARDIAN UNLIMITED Thursday March 15, 2007 The Guardian Fitter, healthier, more productive Britain's medical practitioners are making lifesaving technological advances at local level - by effectively ignoring the costly NHS IT programme, explains Michael Cross .... Patients' rights to data In Hyde, the revolution in healthcare information may have even more profound consequences. It is the first practice in the world to invite every patient to inspect their electronic health record and, if they want, to have it available online. .... Two triumphs of the £14.6bn NHS programme for IT? Hardly. Electronic medical records at Hyde and Portsmouth may be achieving what the national programme, conceived five years ago this spring, is setting out to do. But they are independent efforts, happening not because of the national effort but almost despite it. .... None the less, a change of emphasis is about to take place. In a tacit admission that the existing contracts do not deliver, Connecting for Health is to invite companies to bid to supply alternative systems to those from the big contractors. This may encourage more local innovation. Meanwhile, the chief executive of the NHS, David Nicholson, is talking about giving local organisations more say in what elements of the programme they adopt. [This looks like a move in the direction recommended in my original letter to my MP.] ======================================================================= http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/10/10/218985/Experts+strike+new+NHS+warning+note.htm COMPUTER WEEKLY IT Management Politics & Law Experts strike new NHS warning note by Tony Collins Tuesday 10 October 2006 The government has failed in its attempt to quieten the fears of leading computing academics that the NHS's IT programme may be heading for trouble. .... however, the government has made only too clear it does not want any further independent scrutiny of what is the world's largest non-military IT programme. See also the web site set up by the signatories: http://editthis.info/nhs_it_info/ ======================================================================= http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5389092.stm BBC NEWS Thursday, 28 September 2006, 13:13 GMT 14:13 UK Accenture quits #1.9bn NHS deal IT firm Accenture has pulled out of key parts of a beleaguered #6.2bn upgrade of the NHS computer system. American firm Computer Sciences Corporation has taken over Accenture's #1.9bn contract to implement the Connecting for Health programme. Accenture had responsibility for the roll-out in the North East and East of England but is making big losses on the work and faced fines for late delivery. Problems at another contractor, iSoft, have delayed the project. Accenture will keep responsibility for other parts of the NHS programme, including providing a system that will allow X-rays, scans and other images to be available at the touch of a button. But there are now concerns that its departure could mean further delays at Connecting for Health - which aims to link more than 30,000 GPs with nearly 300 hospitals by 2014. The government was last week urged to reconsider the plan. ======================================================================= http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,19509-2364172,00.html TIMESONLINE Tech & Net The Times September 19, 2006 Patients left waiting on operating tables by computer failures By David Brown HOSPITAL operations and consultations are being delayed across England because the new NHS computer system suffers almost one major incident failure every day. Patients have been left waiting on operating tables and others have had appointments cancelled because of problems with the #12.4 billion system. ..... ======================================================================= http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/09/19/218551/Was+NAO+report+truly+independent.htm COMPUTER WEEKLY IT Management Politics & Law Was NAO report truly independent? by Tony Collins Tuesday 19 September 2006 The National Audit Office's final report on the NPfIT was very different to earlier drafts, which criticised the programme. Was it influenced along the way? ...includes reference to the offer of a body of leading members of UKCRC to conduct a review... ======================================================================= http://politics.guardian.co.uk/publicservices/story/0,,1860168,00.html GUARDIAN UNLIMITED IT deals are failing public services letters Tuesday August 29, 2006 The Guardian Includes a letter suggesting that a similar disaster is involved in the national policy for IT in schools. ======================================================================= http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/08/29/218056/Central+NHS+IT+may+not+work%2c+warns+BCS.htm COMPUTER WEEKLY Central NHS IT may not work, warns BCS by Tony Collins Tuesday 29 August 2006 The British Computer Society has backed calls for a technical review of the health services £12.4bn IT programme, questioning whether the schemes centralised approach will work in the complex structure of the NHS. Among other concerns, the BCS says it has doubts about what it calls the monolithic central national spine the BT-built database which is due to hold summary records on about 50 million patients in England. The spine is pivotal to the National Programme for IT (NPfIT). The concerns are expressed in a private letter to a group of academics who have called for an independent technical audit of the NPfIT. The BCSs comments are not consistent with public comments it had earlier made in defence of Connecting for Health, which runs the NPfIT. And they will add to pressure on the Public Accounts Committee to initiate a fresh review of the programme despite the publication of a positive report by public spending watchdog the National Audit Office. ======================================================================= http://www.computerweekly.com/articles/article.aspx?liArticleID=218034 COMPUTER WEEKLY NAO report: a journey from criticism to praise by Tony Collins Tuesday 29 August 2006 When a report was published in June by the National Audit Office into the NHS's National Programme for IT (NPfIT), it was seen by ministers as a vindication of the UK's decision to spend £12.4bn on the world's largest civil computer scheme. The report was strongly supportive of the scheme and replete with praise for the Department of Health and NHS Connecting for Health, its agency which runs the NPfIT. But earlier drafts seen by Computer Weekly tell a different story to the final NAO report. ======================================================================= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2006/08/28/cnhs28.xml TELEGRAPH What IT crisis? ministers ask By Stephen Seawright (Filed: 28/08/2006) The Government last night insisted there was no risk to its multi-billion pound overhaul of the NHS computer system despite its main software supplier iSoft diving into the red, being investigated by the City's financial watchdog and openly squabbling with its partners. In a statement, the Department of Health said: "The NHS IT programme is not at risk of stalling, in jeopardy or close to collapsing because of iSoft's recent troubles. It [iSoft] confirmed that it will make its new software through 2008 - so in no way is the programme at risk." The news was greeted with incredulity by MPs from both main parties. Paul Farrelly, Labour MP for Newcastle-under-Lyme, said: "The Department of Health was alerted to iSoft in parliamentary questions over two years ago. It responded with a very complacent statement then. This is not the time to repeat that mistake. From iSoft's results announcement... it was quite clear that question marks remain over the future viability of the company." Richard Bacon, Conservative MP for South Norfolk who is also a member of the House of Commons' Public Accounts Committee, added: "The idea there is no risk at all around this project is nonsense." ======================================================================= http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/news/columnists/article.html?in_article_id=412139&in_page_id=19 THISISMONEY.co.uk Who's really to blame for iSoft fiasco? Simon Watkins, Deputy Editor, Financil Mail 27 August 2006 THE debacle at software group iSoft is proving one of the most extraordinary City accounting fiascos of recent years. The group has plunged £383m into the red, has come within a whisker of collapse, is being investigated by the Financial Services Authority, and accountant Deloitte is still carrying out its own examination of the now infamous 'accounting irregularities'. On top of all this, the Serious Fraud Office is understood to be waiting in the wings. All this at a company that is a key supplier in the complete overhaul of computing under way in the NHS. It beggars belief. But it has not made beggars of iSoft's founding directors. Between them they have walked away with tens ofms of pounds after selling shares. .... ======================================================================= http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2095-2330116.html SUNDAY TIMES TIMES ONLINE The Sunday Times - Business The Sunday Times August 27, 2006 Bidders prowling round troubled health service supplier Isoft Dominic O'Connell BIDDERS are circling Isoft, the embattled software firm at the centre of the National Health Service's multi-billion- pound IT upgrade programme. .... Meanwhile, Accenture, another leading player in the NHS IT scheme, is understood to be in talks to renegotiate the terms of its contracts. ... One health-industry source said last night the consulting firm had considered walking away from the programme, but that talks were continuing with Connecting for Health. If Accenture were to withdraw, it would be a crippling blow for the £6.2 billion IT programme, which has been heavily criticised for delays and cost overruns in the past. =======================================================================
Is this next item a clue to the seeds of this disaster, and does it fit a pattern of disastrous high level decisions taken because a prime minister who mostly does not understand what he is doing, and is more concerned to have a Churchillian legacy than to understand the problems faced by the nation, and the world at large, becomes passionately committed to one disastrous project after another? http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,1858787,00.html Guardian Unlimited Business When Bill met Tony, seeds of a grandiose scheme were sown Michael Cross Saturday August 26, 2006 The Guardian When Bill Gates met Tony Blair at Downing Street in 2001 the seeds were sown for the hugely ambitious plan to transform the NHS with the power of computers. Mr Gates, the billionaire software pioneer, had just written a book about how IT could transform economies. The prime minister, determined to reform Britain's public services, was hooked. Just one year later, representatives of Mr Gates's Microsoft empire attended a seminar at No 10 at which the NHS's £12bn IT programme was conceived. A core principle of this grandiose plan was that it should never rely on a single computer contractor and that the work should be carried out by global players. It is a measure of the crisis that these principles have been sacrificed and the NHS finds itself heavily dependent on one contractor, iSoft, a British-based specialist formed only in 2000. ..... Mr Granger likens his relationship with suppliers to that of a polar explorer with his huskies: he once warned companies that weak performers would be fed to the strong. His problem is that he is rather short of huskies to shoot. ======================================================================= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2006/08/18/cnhs18.xml TELEGRAPH NHS delivers fresh blow to sickly iSoft By Josephine Mouds (Filed: 18/08/2006) Troubled software company iSoft has suffered another blow after an NHS trust abandoned the implementation of its patient management system, part of the national programme to digitise patient health records, after several delays. advertisement The Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust said it took the decision because a number of requirements had not been met before the system was due to go live in June this year. The trust is now seeking an "alternative solution" but said it was still committed to the national programme. This is the third NHS trust to abandon the implementation of the iSoft system. A spokesman for iSoft was keen to point out that the trust had suspended the contracts with Accenture, which had contracted iSoft. ======================================================================= http://www.e-health-insider.com/news/item.cfm?ID=2073 e-Health Insider Sheffield abandons iSoft iPM implementation 16 Aug 2006 Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust has abandoned plans to implement a new patient administration system from iSoft, the first stage of the local Care Records Service (CRS) software being offered to it under the NHS Connecting for Health programme. .... Sheffield's Board finally decided to call a halt to the implementation of iSoft iPM on 9 August. In a statement the trust told E-Health Insider the decision was reached because: "A number of requirements were not met before the go live date of June 2006. These requirements were agreed by senior representatives of the trust, the LSP and CfH." ... Chris Linacre, director of service development at the trust said Sheffield remained committed to NPfIT: "The trust is a complex organisation and is in a unique position in that we currently use three different PAS systems across two hospital sites. Replacing these with a single PAS system is a significant project so we must be certain that the new universal system will meet the complex requirements of all of the five hospitals." ... Earlier this month Bradford Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, also situated in the North-east Accenture cluster, went out to open procurement for a PAS system. In December 2005 Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Trust, in the eastern Accenture cluster, abandoned plans to implement the CfH PAS choosing to further develop its existing McKesson system. ======================================================================= http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/06/06/nhs_contract_chaos/ The Register: Management section NHS IT costs hospitals dear Fujitsu scores £19m compo By John Oates Published Tuesday 6th June 2006 14:37 GMT More bad news for the UK government's NHS IT programme - cash-strapped health authorities are having to pay millions in compensation to Fujitsu and CSC . When contracts were first set up by central government, NHS trusts promised to provide staff to help work on the new systems. But according to reports, health authorities in the south of England have failed to find enough people so they have to pay Fujitsu $19m compensation. The south of England was supposed to find 50 staff to work at Fujitsu. ... In the north west and west Midlands, the NHS is contracted to provide 50 staff but is struggling to find enough people. ... Health trusts are looking at ways to buy their way out of the ageements, according to documents seen by Computer Weekly which has more details here. http://www.computerweekly.com/Home/Articles/2006/06/05/216255/Suppliers+'fine'+NHS+over+IT+plan+delivery.htm .... Last week, MPs announced they are considering a full audit of the world's largest ever IT project - they fear the budget of £6.5bn will overrun. A BBC survey last week revealed that doctors are very unhappy with the Choose and Book system supposed to deal with hospital appointments. What's more, Lord Warner said last month that the patient records system was likely to cost £20bn rather than the £6.3bn originally quoted, and arrive two and a half years late. Government IT projects either fail because of overambitious, and under-achieving, suppliers or because of incompetent and feckless civil servants. Rarely do they manage to do such damage to both suppliers and customers before anything is actually delivered. ======================================================================= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/06/04/nhs04.xml TELEGRAPH Computer says no' to Mr Blair's botched £20bn NHS upgrade (Filed: 04/06/2006) The Prime Minister's dream of a 'paperless NHS', using 21st century, state of the art information technology, is in danger of crashing under a mountain of problems. Beezy Marsh reports .... Yet the glitzy, "joined-up" NHS remains a low-tech hotch-potch. Doctors are largely unimpressed. Dr Richard Vautrey, a GP in Leeds and spokesman for the British Medical Association on IT, has struggled for months, for example, to get "choose and book" working. ======================================================================= http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/06/01/nhs_it_survey/ The Register BBC survey damns NHS IT system Connecting for Health moves to limit damage By Kablenet Published Thursday 1st June 2006 09:40 GMT Connecting for Health (CfH) has defended the NHS National Programme for IT (NPfIT) against the negative results of a new survey. The Medix survey, carried out for BBC programme File on 4, concludes that a "significant minority" of doctors were questioning whether the current route is the most effective. It shows that over a third of the doctors responding and 11 per cent of hospital colleagues were in favour of abandoning the programme. .... Half of GPs interviewed for the Medix survey said the Choose and Book system was poor or fairly poor. Four out of five GPs said they had access to the computer system but half said they rarely or never used it. Only one in five said it was good or fairly good. ======================================================================= http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5028762.stm BBC NEWS Tuesday, 30 May 2006, 08:54 GMT 09:54 UK GPs dissatisfied with IT system Half the GPs surveyed did not use the computer booking system Doctors have called for a review into the £6.2bn NHS computer project, according to a survey by BBC News. The IT upgrade aims to link up 30,000 GPs to nearly 300 hospitals in a radical overhaul of the NHS IT network. Half of the GPs said the "choose and book" online booking system was poor or fairly poor. The poll was completed by 447 hospital doctors and 340 GPs. .... And Richard Bacon, a member of the Public Accounts Committee, said the entire project had been plagued by a "whole load of problems", while choose and book was "little short of a disaster". ======================================================================= http://www.cbronline.com/article_news.asp?guid=3CC199E8-47F7-4A54-A5F8-B889DCC6EDA5 Computer Business Review Secrecy of NHS contracts begins to unravel 10th May 2005 By CBR Staff Writer The UK National Health Service's enormous IT overhaul is beginning to show signs of strain, only 18 months after the NHS signed deals worth a total of GBP6bn ($11bn) with a number of vendors. So far though, it is the suppliers rather than the UK government that are looking decidedly unwell. The companies involved are being gagged by some totalitarian-style privacy rules, but news of problems is beginning to surface. .... Public-sector contracts in the UK have become synonymous with cost overruns, and the government has suffered embarrassing high-profile failures at a number of its departments including the Child Support Agency and the Inland Revenue. Because the NPfIT is the most expensive and most ambitious public-sector project in the world, the government is under intense pressure to make it succeed. Controversially, the government has deemed it necessary to demand that suppliers keep secret the details such as delivery deadlines of the contracts, hoping to avoid the bad publicity it has suffered previously. So far, very little is known about the structure of the deals, but this could change. .... ======================================================================= http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2005/05/03/209771/Did+Blair+approve+NHS+scheme+without+knowing+the+full.htm COMPUTER WEEKLY Did Blair approve NHS scheme without knowing the full risks? by Tony Collins Tuesday 3 May 2005 The risks involved in rolling out the worlds biggest civil IT programme were significantly underestimated when ministers initiated the project in 2002, according to evidence unearthed by Computer Weekly. ======================================================================= http://www.silicon.com/publicsector/0,3800010403,39158341,00.htm SILICON.COM PUBLIC SECTOR NEWS NHS IT refresh to face independent inquiry Concern over "viability" of multi-billion pound upgrade... Printer Friendly Email Story By Tom Espiner and Graeme Wearden Published: Tuesday 25 April 2006 An independent inquiry will be held later this year into the government's multi-billion pound upgrade of the NHS IT systems, which has been widely criticised by experts. ======================================================================= http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/04/12/215322/NHS+Focus+Top+UK+IT+experts+demand+audit+of+troubled.htm COMPUTER WEEKLY NHS Focus: Top UK IT experts demand audit of troubled system by Tony Collins Wednesday 12 April 2006 Leading computer science experts are this week writing to parliament calling for an independent audit of the NHS national programme for IT (NPfIT). The signatories, 23 of the UK's top academics in computer-related sciences, are concerned about the technical feasibility of a fully integrated national programme. ======================================================================= http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/03/14/215264/Theexpertscallingforareview.htm COMPUTER WEEKLY Signatories to health committee letter Tuesday 11 April 2006 ======================================================================= http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/04/11/215263/QuestionsthatneedtobeansweredonNHSITplan.htm COMPUTER WEEKLY Questions that need to be answered on NHS IT plan by Tony Collins Tuesday 11 April 2006 Four years ago the government announced to a grateful NHS a national IT programme that would become the world's largest civil computer scheme. But after a breathless start, delivery dates for key software were missed, the full costs of implementation have always been unclear, and experts are divided over whether the scheme is too ambitious to ever work as originally planned. Now the IT community's leading academics have written an open letter to parliament's Health Select Committee calling for an independent audit of the national programme for IT. In doing so they are echoing a campaign launched by Computer Weekly last year for an independent audit. Below we publish the letter in full, together with a list of its signatories. On pages 16 and 18 we summarise our coverage of the ....=======================================================================
http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/03/14/215263/OpenlettertoHealthSelectCommittee.htm COMPUTER WEEKLY Questions that need to be answered on NHS IT plan by Tony Collins Tuesday 11 April 2006 The open letter: THE NATIONAL PROGRAMME FOR IT IN THE NHS The Select Committee may be aware of the concerns of health professionals, technologists and professional organisations about the £6bn NHS National Programme for information technology (NPfIT): * The NHS Confederation has said, "The IT changes being proposed are individually technically feasible but they have not been integrated, so as to provide comprehensive solutions, anywhere else in the world". * Two of NPfIT's largest suppliers have issued warnings about profits in relation to their work and a third has been fined for inadequate performance. * The British Computer Society has expressed concern that NPfIT may show a shortfall of billions of pounds. * Various independent surveys show that support from healthcare staff is not assured. * There have been delays in the delivery of core software for NPfIT. Concrete, objective information about NPfIT's progress is not available to external observers. Reliable sources within NPfIT have raised concerns about the technology itself. The National Audit Office report about NPfIT is delayed until this summer, at the earliest; the report is not expected to address major technical issues. As computer scientists, engineers and informaticians, we question the wisdom of continuing NPfIT without an independent assessment of its basic technical viability. We suggest an assessment should ask challenging questions and issue concrete recommendations where appropriate, e.g.: Does NPfIT have a comprehensive, robust: * Technical architecture? * Project plan? * Detailed design? Have these documents been reviewed by experts of calibre appropriate to the scope of NPfIT? Are the architecture and components of NPfIT likely to: * Meet the current and future needs of stakeholders? * Support the need for continuous (i.e. 24x7) healthcare IT support and fully address patient safety and organisational continuity issues? * Conform to guidance from the Information Commissioner in respect to patient confidentiality and the Data Protection Act? Have realistic assessments been carried out about the: * Volumes of data and traffic that a fully functioning NPfIT will have to support across the thousands of healthcare organisations in England? * Need for responsiveness, reliability, resilience and recovery under routine and full system load? We propose that the Health Select Committee help resolve uncertainty about NPfIT by asking the government to commission an independent technical assessment with all possible speed. The assessment would cost a tiny proportion of the proposed minimum £6bn spend on NPfIT and could save many times its cost.Comment by A.S.:
If the analysis I have presented is correct, the project management requirements referred to in that letter are not nearly radical enough, though of course the questions raised in it are very important.The letter was signed by the following:
Ross Anderson Professor of Security Engineering Cambridge University James Backhouse Director, Information System Integrity Group London School of Economics David Bustard Professor and Head of Computing and Information Engineering University of Ulster Ewart Carson Professor of Systems Science Centre for Health Informatics City University Patrik O'Brian Holt Professor School of Computing The Robert Gordon University Roland Ibbett Professor School of Informatics University of Edinburgh Ray Ison Professor of Systems The Open University Achim Jung Professor School of Computer Science University of Birmingham Frank Land Emeritus Professor Information Systems Department London School of Economics Bev Littlewood Professor of Software Engineering City University John A McDermid Professor of Software Engineering University of York Julian Newman Professor of Computing Glasgow Caledonian University Brian Randell Professor School of Computing Science University of Newcastle Uday Reddy Professor School of Computer Science University of Birmingham Peter Ryan Professor of Computing Science University of Newcastle Geoffrey Sampson Professor Department of Informatics University of Sussex Martin Shepperd Professor of Software Technologies Brunel University Michael Smith Visiting Professor Department of Computer Science University College London Tony Solomonides Reader in Computer Science and Medical Informatics University of the West of England Ian Sommerville Professor Computing Department Lancaster University Harold Thimbleby Professor of Computer Science Swansea University Martyn Thomas Visiting Professor of Software Engineering Computing Laboratory Oxford University Colin Tully Professor of Software Practice School of Computing Science Middlesex UniversitySome of those who signed the letter also wrote to me after reading my open letter. Their letters are included here.
======================================================================= http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/0,39020645,39262584,00.htm ZDNet UK April 11, 2006, 13:25 BST A group of UK technology experts have urged MPs to take a close look at the NHS National Programme for IT, amid growing fears over the scheme's progress A group of UK computer science academics have called for the Government to rethink its strategy for reforming the technology infrastructure of the NHS. In an open letter sent to the Parliamentary Select Committee on Health on Tuesday, 23 academics highlighted their concerns over the changes proposed by the Government in the £6.2bn National Programme for IT (NpfIT). They called for a "thorough, independent technical review" of the scheme. ======================================================================= http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/04/11/215264/Signatories+to+health+committee+letter.htm COMPUTER WEEKLY Signatories to health committee letter Tuesday 11 April 2006 ======================================================================= http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/04/07/215309/TopUKITexpertscallforauditofNHSprogramme.htm COMPUTER WEEKLY Top UK IT experts call for audit of NHS programme by Tony Collins Tuesday 11 April 2006 Leading computer science experts are this week writing to parliament calling for an independent audit of the NHS national programme for IT (NPfIT). ======================================================================= http://www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=2157 CHANNEL4.COM Health IT review Published: 11 Apr 2006 By: Victoria Macdonald There are calls for a review of the NHS's new IT system after fears it could end in disaster.
School of Computer Science
The University of Birmingham